1. Identifying ‘textual works’ ISTC:controversy and potential Patrick Le Bœuf FRBR in 21st century catalogues: an invitational workshop Dublin, Ohio, May 2-4, 2005

2. Facts and figures to start with • ISTC = International Standard Text Code • ISO DIS 21047 by ISO TC 46 SC 9 WG 3 • Work began in 2000 • 2004: CISAC / Nielsen BookData / R. R. Bowker Consortium elected as future Registration Authority • May 30, 2005: deadline for approval by ISO members

3. Why ISTC? • Digital environment of the text supply chain: e-production, e-formats, e-commerce… • Other available identifiers for “abstract” content: ISRC, ISWC, ISAN • Need for an identifier “above” the ISBN level, “above” the publication (in whatever form) level

4. Who was involved in the ISTC development? rightssocieties librarians insisted on FRBR-compatibility focused on the authors’ viewpoint insisted on <indecs>-ONIX-compatibility publishers

5. A key concept: Functional Granularity • Functional Granularity means: • If I need it, I can do it • If I don’t need it, I don’t have to do it • As a consequence, ISTC applies to various things, meets various needs

6. What does ISTC identify at all? Foreword Text 1 Translationof text 1 Text 2 Illustra-tions Foreword Text 1, bilingual Text 2, illustrated Principle ofFunctionalGranularity Foreword Texts 1 & 2 Overall content

7. What qualifies as a distinct “textual work”? Collection (anthology, etc.) Principle ofFunctionalGranularity Text Chapter(section, act,scene…) Adaptation Translation ISTC notion of ‘a Work’ different from FRBR Digest

8. Irreconcilable views? (1) Hamlet ISTC Tamburlaine ISTC Hamletillustrated ISTC Tamburlaine illustrated ISTC Hamlet + Tamburlaine ISTC

9. Irreconcilable views? (2) • FRBR: • Language = Attribute of an Expression, not of a Work(although FRAR recognizes the “Original Language of the Work” attribute) • The Work Hamlet is not in English; it has English, French, Spanish, etc. Expressions • ISTC: • Language = Mandatory element in ISTC metadata for a textual Work • The Work Hamlet is in English and has derived Works in French, Spanish, etc.

10. Reconciling the irreconcilable? • FRBR-CRM Harmonization Group: • A Work cannot be identified unless you identify a representative Expression thereof • A Work has a representative Expression that has a Language (= “Original Language of the Work” in FRAR) • A proposal for reviewing FRBR: • Adopt the FRAR “Original Language of the Work” attribute and define it as reflecting the privileged relationship between the Work Hamlet and the English language: Hamlet “is” not “in” English, but “was first expressed in” English (or even “was conceived in” English?)

11. Functional Granularity again • If librarians don’t need a given type of ISTC (e.g., Hamlet+Tamburlaine), they don’t have to use it • If librarians need a type of ISTC that is not extant (e.g., Hamlet-as-a-FRBR-supralinguistic-Work), they can apply for it • Problems: • It costs money – who’ll pay? • How to explicate in ISTC metadata the subtle distinction between Hamlet-the-Expression (‘Language’ attribute = English) and Hamlet-the-Work (‘Original Language of the Work’ attribute = English)?

12. ISTC potential for libraries (1) • xISBN is defined at the FRBR Work level • ISTC matches more or less the Expression level •  ISTC could be used to define Expression-subsets of xISBN • Possible application for FictionFinder: not just “Hamlet in German”, but precisely which German translation of Hamlet

13. ISTC potential for libraries (2) • ILL: Tool for suggesting alternative choices when the requested item is unavailable • Cataloguing: automated reuse of ISTC metadata in authority records for Expressions??? • Cataloguing: Tool for checking accuracy of data by comparing info from title-page with info from ISTC metadata • OPACs: Tool for making FRBRization easier (at least at the Expression level, possibly at the Work level too)

14. ISTC in a network of identifiers Work Expression Manifestation

15. Practical issues • ISTC is a nice intellectual construct, but is it feasible? • Not all ISTCs will be useful to librarians – should they record those that are not? • Should librarians extend the ISTC scope to cover (super)“works”? • Are libraries willing to manage retrospective ISTCization?

16. Thanks for your patience! • Thanks to all those who re-read this presentation and helped me correct it: • Anila Angjeli • Mark Bide • Martin Doerr • Elizabeth Giuliani • René Lloret • Godfrey Rust • Jean-Louis Pineau patrick.le-boeuf@bnf.fr